Wednesday's letters: Early voting

Published: Wednesday, May 8, 2013 at 4:30 a.m.

Last Modified: Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 6:18 p.m.

To the editor: I am upset that N.C. lawmakers have introduced bills that would make it more difficult for citizens to vote by cutting the hours of early voting. Not everyone can get off work to vote or stand in long lines. Last year, over half of North Carolina joined me in voting early.

Shorter lines, more convenient polling places and weekend hours make it possible for more people to vote. Why are lawmakers trying to make it harder? They need to work on real problems.

Another upsetting aspect of the voting bill is the provision that parents of college students who vote in their college’s county cannot claim them as a dependent on their taxes. The students must register their cars in that county, whether or not the cars belong to them. I have a son in college, and it was much easier for him, and for me, when he was able to vote in Boone instead getting an absentee ballot sent to him, and then get it back to Henderson County.

I’m quite sure that parents of most, if not all, college-age students will not be happy with our General Assembly if this bill passes.

Leslie Sladky-Hillman

Fletcher

Public education

To the editor: When does it stop? There was a small article tucked away on page 4C of last Friday’s Times-News headlined “House tentatively passes bill limiting eligibility to state’s pre-K program.”

Isabel Sawhill, Cabot Family chair and senior fellow of economic studies at the Brookings Institution, has repeatedly written, lectured and testified before Congress about the solution to poverty. She argues that our focus should be on three priorities: “getting a good education, not having children before you marry, and working full-time.”

Getting a good education includes a very high-quality early education for all children from low-income families starting in the first year of life; well-qualified teachers (who are paid competitively with other available careers [my addition]); low ratios of children to staff; a tested and effective curriculum; additional support in early grades of school (teaching assistants [my addition]); dealing with impediments to success, e.g. the need for extra tutoring and health problems, including mental health/behavioral problems; and, yes, comprehensive sex education.

This continuing assault by Republicans on public education at every level in North Carolina is only worsening. Poverty breeds poverty. It must stop!

Clay Eddleman

Hendersonville

Chemophobia

To the editor: Not everyone got good grades in high school chemistry, but if someone is going to write an alarmist letter to the newspaper about “very dangerous” chemicals that are “carcinogenic,” it behooves him to get his facts straight.

The five industrial chemicals listed in the recent letter (“Gas disaster,” last Thursday’s edition) may have scary names, but they are widely encountered in commerce and daily life. Ethylbenzene is a precursor to polystyrene and also used as an anti-knock agent in gasoline. Ethylene glycol is the primary ingredient in antifreeze. Glutaraldehyde is a medical disinfectant and wart treatment. Isopropanol in found in your medicine chest — it’s called rubbing alcohol. And methanol (wood alcohol) is a component of the “dry gas” added to your car’s gas tank.

While all of these are chemicals are hazardous at various levels (methanol found in badly made moonshine will make you blind), none of them is classified as a carcinogen by the Environmental Protection Agency, the agency responsible for the safety of chemicals in the environment.

A quick Google search would have revealed the facts.

The merits and risks of shale gas recovery and “fracking” need to be discussed on their own level. To muddy the argument with false and misleading rants about “toxic chemicals” does a disservice to your readers and only serves to feed an unjustified chemophobia among the general public.

<p>To the editor: I am upset that N.C. lawmakers have introduced bills that would make it more difficult for citizens to vote by cutting the hours of early voting. Not everyone can get off work to vote or stand in long lines. Last year, over half of North Carolina joined me in voting early.</p><p>Shorter lines, more convenient polling places and weekend hours make it possible for more people to vote. Why are lawmakers trying to make it harder? They need to work on real problems.</p><p>Another upsetting aspect of the voting bill is the provision that parents of college students who vote in their college’s county cannot claim them as a dependent on their taxes. The students must register their cars in that county, whether or not the cars belong to them. I have a son in college, and it was much easier for him, and for me, when he was able to vote in Boone instead getting an absentee ballot sent to him, and then get it back to Henderson County.</p><p>I’m quite sure that parents of most, if not all, college-age students will not be happy with our General Assembly if this bill passes.</p><p><em>Leslie Sladky-Hillman</em></p><p><em>Fletcher</em></p><h3>Public education</h3>
<p>To the editor: When does it stop? There was a small article tucked away on page 4C of last Friday’s Times-News headlined House tentatively passes bill limiting eligibility to state’s pre-K program.</p><p>Isabel Sawhill, Cabot Family chair and senior fellow of economic studies at the Brookings Institution, has repeatedly written, lectured and testified before Congress about the solution to poverty. She argues that our focus should be on three priorities: getting a good education, not having children before you marry, and working full-time.</p><p>Getting a good education includes a very high-quality early education for all children from low-income families starting in the first year of life; well-qualified teachers (who are paid competitively with other available careers [my addition]); low ratios of children to staff; a tested and effective curriculum; additional support in early grades of school (teaching assistants [my addition]); dealing with impediments to success, e.g. the need for extra tutoring and health problems, including mental health/behavioral problems; and, yes, comprehensive sex education.</p><p>This continuing assault by Republicans on public education at every level in North Carolina is only worsening. Poverty breeds poverty. It must stop!</p><p><em>Clay Eddleman</em></p><p><em>Hendersonville</em></p><h3>Chemophobia</h3>
<p>To the editor: Not everyone got good grades in high school chemistry, but if someone is going to write an alarmist letter to the newspaper about very dangerous chemicals that are carcinogenic, it behooves him to get his facts straight.</p><p>The five industrial chemicals listed in the recent letter (Gas disaster, last Thursday’s edition) may have scary names, but they are widely encountered in commerce and daily life. Ethylbenzene is a precursor to polystyrene and also used as an anti-knock agent in gasoline. Ethylene glycol is the primary ingredient in antifreeze. Glutaraldehyde is a medical disinfectant and wart treatment. Isopropanol in found in your medicine chest  it’s called rubbing alcohol. And methanol (wood alcohol) is a component of the dry gas added to your car’s gas tank.</p><p>While all of these are chemicals are hazardous at various levels (methanol found in badly made moonshine will make you blind), none of them is classified as a carcinogen by the Environmental Protection Agency, the agency responsible for the safety of chemicals in the environment.</p><p>A quick Google search would have revealed the facts.</p><p>The merits and risks of shale gas recovery and fracking need to be discussed on their own level. To muddy the argument with false and misleading rants about toxic chemicals does a disservice to your readers and only serves to feed an unjustified chemophobia among the general public.</p><p><em>Philip Rakita</em></p><p><em>Retired professor</p><p>of chemistry</p><p><em>Hendersonville</em></p>